9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 108X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (T) S/Shri V. Laxmikumaran, Ravi Raghavan and Kapil Vaish, C.A., for the Appellant. Shri H.K. Thakur, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: M. Veeraiyan, Member (T)]. - This appeal was heard pursuant to remand directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment reported in 2007 (212) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are as follows :- (a) The appellant is a manufacturer of matches following under chapter heading 360500. They manufacture 'match sticks' and also manufacture 'empty match boxes' (also referred to as printed paperboard boxes) for packing the match sticks. (b) They buy duty paid paper and paperboard for manufacture of such printed paperboard boxes. During the cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Learned Advocate submits that the appellant is not a manufacturer of paper and paperboard. They have procured duty paid paper and paperboard from other manufacturers; they have not taken any Cenvat credit of duty paid on paper and paperboard. The waste scrap and parings were generated not during the course of manufacturing of paper and paper boxes but during the use of paper and paperboard for manufacture of empty match boxes. They sold the waste paper and paperboard at a very nominal price. 4.2 He relied on the following decisions to claim that the impugned goods are not excisable :- 1. Kores India Ltd. v. CCE, Chennai - 2004 (174) E.L.T. 7 (S.C.) 2 . Shyam Oil Cake Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur - 2004 (174) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.) 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The yardsticks to determine whether the product has come into existence due to manufacture have been elaborated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in various cases. 6.2 We quote from the case of Kores India Ltd. v. CCE, Chennai - 2004 (174) E.L.T. 7 (S.C.) the following paras which are relevant reproduced below :- 11. Manufacture implies a change but every change is not manufacture, yet every change of an article is the result of treatment, labour and manipulation. Naturally, manufacture is the end result of one or more through which the original commodities are made to pass. The nature and extent of processing may vary from one class to another. There may be several stages of processing, a different kind of processing at each stage. W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g it marketable. The essential point thus is that in manufacture something is brought into existence, which is different from that, which originally existed in the sense that the thing produced is by itself a commercially different commodity whereas in the case of processing it is not necessary to produce a commercially different article. [See M/s. Saraswati Sugar Mills and others v. Haryana State Board and others [1992 (1) SCC 418]. 13. The prevalent and generally accepted test to ascertain that there is 'manufacture' is whether the change or the series of changes brought about by the application of processes take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it can no longer be regarded as the original commodity but is, instead, r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... market. They are not the manufacturer of paper and paperboard and they are merely consumers of paper and paperboard. When they used such paper and paperboard for manufacture of empty boxes, some quantity of waste, scrap and parings of paper and paperboard has arisen. They had no intention to manufacture of scrap waste or paring. The intention is to minimize/avoid the wastage and not to produce the same. These scrap/waste/paring also cannot be considered as intermediate product or by product during the course of manufacture of any excisable goods. No new product has come into existence. The scrap of paper cannot be considered as a product different from the paper; the waste arising out of paperboard is not a product different from paperboar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
